Correspondence with Unrepresented Opponents
When you instruct solicitors in a dispute, one of the first formal steps may be a letter before claim or other legal correspondence to the other side
This can be particularly important where the opponent is acting for themselves and does not have solicitors. This often happens in neighbour disputes, trespass claims, nuisance disputes, boundary disputes, family disputes, debt claims, property disagreements and disputes between individuals.
We understand that clients often feel strongly about what they want said. That is completely understandable. By the time a solicitor is instructed, the dispute may already feel personal, stressful and unfair.
However, correspondence sent on a solicitor’s letterhead is not just a typed-up version of the client’s personal views. It is formal legal correspondence. It may later be shown to the court. It may affect costs. It may be relied upon when the court considers whether the parties behaved reasonably before proceedings were issued.
For that reason, we have to make sure that correspondence sent on your behalf is accurate, proportionate, professionally appropriate and in your best legal interests.
The client’s role and the solicitor’s role
The client controls the instructions.
That means the client decides what outcome they want, what settlement they would accept, what facts they say are true, what evidence they want us to consider, and whether they want to send a letter before claim, negotiate, mediate, issue proceedings or take another step.
The solicitor is responsible for the professional form of the correspondence.
That includes the legal framing, the tone, the procedural wording, how allegations are expressed, whether costs are claimed and how they are described, whether ADR wording is included, and whether threats of proceedings are accurate and proportionate.
This distinction matters. A solicitor’s letter must comply with professional duties, the Civil Procedure Rules, the relevant pre-action rules, and the SRA Code of Conduct. We cannot send wording simply because a client wants it included if, in our professional judgment, it would be inaccurate, misleading, unfair, disproportionate, tactically harmful, or likely to expose the client to criticism later.
The SRA’s guidance on conduct in disputes makes clear that solicitors must not make allegations without merit, advance positions which are not properly arguable, or use correspondence in a way which is unfair, oppressive or misleading. The SRA has also highlighted the importance of avoiding hostile or unnecessarily aggressive correspondence in disputes.
Why extra care is needed with unrepresented opponents
Where the opponent has solicitors, their solicitor can advise them on what a letter means, what the legal risks are, and how they should respond.
Where the opponent is unrepresented, they may not understand legal terminology, pre-action rules, costs consequences, undertakings, injunctions, disclosure, ADR, or the difference between a demand and a court order.
That does not mean the client’s case must be weakened. It means the letter should be clear, fair and proportionate.
The Law Society, Bar Council and CILEx guidance on litigants in person says lawyers should communicate clearly and avoid legal jargon, or explain legal language where it cannot be avoided.
For that reason, letters to unrepresented opponents will often include wording such as:
“As you are not currently represented by solicitors, we have tried to set out our client’s position as clearly as possible. We cannot advise you, and nothing in this letter should be treated as legal advice to you. You may wish to take independent legal advice on the contents of this letter as soon as possible.”
This wording does not assist the opponent at the client’s expense. It protects the client, because it makes the letter fair, clear and less vulnerable to criticism later.
What is a letter before claim?
A letter before claim is not simply an angry letter. It is a formal pre-action document.
The Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols expects parties to exchange enough information to understand each other’s position, make decisions about settlement, consider ADR, and try to avoid unnecessary litigation. It also expects parties to act reasonably and proportionately before proceedings are issued.
A good letter before claim should usually identify the parties, explain the factual background, set out the legal basis of the proposed claim, summarise the remedy sought, identify the key documents or evidence relied upon, invite the opponent to respond, consider ADR, give a reasonable deadline, and explain what may happen if the matter is not resolved.
In a trespass, nuisance or property interference case, the letter should usually identify the land or property affected, the acts complained of, the dates or approximate dates, the photographs or survey evidence relied upon, the loss claimed, and whether the client is seeking damages only or also undertakings, reinstatement, an injunction or a declaration.
Why tone matters
Clients often want correspondence to express their anger, frustration, suspicion or contempt for the other side. That reaction may be entirely understandable. It is rarely tactically helpful.
A court is unlikely to reward sarcastic, insulting, speculative or emotionally loaded correspondence. It can distract from the legal merits and may make the client appear unreasonable.
For example, a client may want to say:
“Your actions make no sense and appear to have been done purely to cause trouble.”
A solicitor may reframe that as:
“Please explain the purpose of the actions complained of above, and the basis on which you considered you were entitled to take those steps.”
The second version preserves the point. It asks for an explanation. It avoids unnecessary hostility. It is more likely to be viewed as reasonable and professional.
The strongest letter is not always the most aggressive letter. The strongest letter is usually the one that a judge can read quickly and understand exactly what happened, what remedy is sought, and why the client’s position is reasonable.
Allegations must be properly framed
A solicitor can put forward the client’s factual case. However, allegations must be expressed carefully.
Where something is based on the client’s instructions, we may say:
“Our client’s position is that...”
or:
“We are instructed that...”
or:
“Our client says that...”
This is particularly important where the facts are disputed or where every detail has not been independently verified.
However, simply saying “our client instructs us” does not allow solicitors to send misleading, abusive, legally unsustainable or oppressive wording. We cannot avoid professional responsibility by putting the client’s words in quotation marks. The solicitor remains responsible for correspondence sent on the firm’s letterhead.
ADR is not weakness
Clients sometimes ask for ADR wording to be removed because they feel it sounds weak.
It is not weak.
ADR wording is included because it protects the client. The court expects parties to consider settlement and alternative dispute resolution before proceedings are issued. The Civil Procedure Rules require cases to be dealt with justly and at proportionate cost, and CPR Part 1 now expressly includes using, promoting and facilitating alternative dispute resolution where appropriate.
ADR may include mediation, a without prejudice meeting, expert determination, a round-table meeting, written settlement proposals, undertakings to avoid further incidents, or agreement on remedial works.
A suitable paragraph may say:
“Our client remains willing to consider any reasonable proposal for resolving this matter without court proceedings. This may include correspondence, a without prejudice meeting, mediation, or another suitable form of alternative dispute resolution. If you consider that another form of ADR would be appropriate, please set out your proposal in your response.”
This keeps pressure on the opponent while showing the court that the client acted reasonably.
Costs wording must be accurate
Costs are one of the main areas where clients can understandably want to overstate the position.
A client may feel that the opponent should pay every penny of legal costs caused by the dispute. That may be morally understandable, but it is not always legally recoverable.
In lower-value claims, especially claims likely to be allocated to the small claims track, recoverable costs are very limited. CPR Part 27 governs the small claims track and limits the amount of costs that can usually be recovered in claims allocated to that track.
For that reason, it may be unsafe to say:
“You will be liable for all our client’s legal costs.”
A safer formulation is:
“If proceedings become necessary, our client may ask the court to make such orders as are appropriate in relation to costs, insofar as recoverable under the Civil Procedure Rules and subject to the court’s discretion.”
That preserves the client’s position without misleading the opponent.
Damages and costs are not the same thing
In a trespass, nuisance or property interference claim, the client may be entitled to claim damages for losses caused by the alleged wrongdoing.
Depending on the evidence, that may include reinstatement costs, repair costs, replacement of damaged items, reasonable surveyor’s fees caused by the removal or disturbance of boundary markers, reasonable expert costs caused by the wrongdoing, or consequential loss directly caused by the trespass or nuisance.
However, ordinary solicitor and client costs, general correspondence costs, time spent preparing the claim, and general administrative inconvenience are not automatically recoverable as damages.
This distinction matters. A claim that includes unrecoverable costs may be criticised as inflated or misleading.
A careful damages paragraph may say:
“Our client’s current claim for damages is £[sum]. This sum is claimed as damages for losses said to have been caused by the alleged trespass, property interference and disturbance of survey markers. For the avoidance of doubt, our client does not seek to recover ordinary solicitor and client costs or general pre-action correspondence costs as damages. Any claim for court fees, fixed costs, expert fees, legal costs or other litigation costs will be pursued only insofar as recoverable under the Civil Procedure Rules and subject to the discretion of the court.”
This protects the client from the criticism that they are trying to disguise legal costs as damages.
Undertakings must be proportionate
In trespass, nuisance and neighbour disputes, it may be appropriate to ask the opponent for undertakings.
An undertaking is a formal promise. It may be used to avoid the need for an injunction.
However, when writing to an unrepresented opponent, undertakings should be framed carefully. The letter should not make it appear that the opponent is already subject to a court order. The undertaking should be linked to the alleged wrongdoing and should not be wider than necessary.
Instead of saying:
“Our client requires the following undertakings...”
it may be better to say:
“To resolve this matter without court proceedings, our client asks that you provide the following undertakings...”
In a boundary or trespass dispute, it is also important not to assume away the very issue in dispute. If the opponent disputes the boundary, wording such as “our client’s property” may be challenged. A safer phrase may be:
“land which our client says forms part of [property address] and which is identified in this letter and the enclosed material”
That protects the client’s position while recognising that the opponent may dispute the facts.
Evidence preservation requests should be fair
It is appropriate to ask an opponent to preserve evidence once litigation is reasonably contemplated.
This may include photographs, messages, emails, CCTV footage, doorbell footage, contractor communications, survey documents, title documents, plans and correspondence.
However, the request should be framed as a reasonable preservation request, not as if the opponent is already subject to a disclosure order.
Appropriate wording may be:
“As court proceedings are now reasonably contemplated, please take reasonable steps to preserve documents, photographs, messages, videos, CCTV footage, doorbell footage, contractor communications, survey documents and other evidence which may be relevant to the matters complained of.”
This is firm, but fair.
Deadlines must be reasonable
Clients often want very short deadlines. Short deadlines can sometimes be justified, particularly where the matter is urgent or the interference is ongoing.
However, where the opponent is unrepresented, the deadline must still be reasonable. The opponent may need time to read the letter, gather documents, take advice, or respond properly.
For a straightforward urgent issue, 14 days may be appropriate. For a fuller substantive response involving documents, plans, survey evidence or CCTV, 21 days may be more defensible.
In some cases, it may be sensible to use two deadlines:
“Given our client’s concern about further interference, please confirm within 14 days that you will not enter onto, place items upon, remove markers from, or otherwise interfere with land or property which our client says belongs to him pending resolution of the dispute.”
“Please provide your full substantive response, including any documents upon which you rely, within 21 days of the date of this letter.”
This protects the client urgently while still allowing the unrepresented opponent a fair opportunity to respond.
The opponent should be invited to obtain legal advice
A letter to an unrepresented opponent should normally make clear that we do not act for them, we cannot advise them, they may wish to obtain independent legal advice, and if they instruct solicitors, future correspondence can be sent to those solicitors.
Suitable wording is:
“We act only for our client. We cannot advise you, and nothing in this letter should be treated as legal advice to you.
You may wish to take independent legal advice as soon as possible. If you instruct solicitors, please ask them to contact us so that future correspondence can be sent to them.”
This is not just a courtesy. It helps protect against any later suggestion that the opponent was confused about our role.
Response requests should not be oppressive
It is appropriate to ask the opponent to respond to specific points.
However, with an unrepresented person, the letter should not read like a cross-examination or a court order. It is usually better to ask them to address matters “so far as they are able”.
For example:
“If you deny liability, please address the following matters so far as you are able to do so...”
That is usually safer than saying:
“If you deny liability, your response must set out...”
The first version is still clear. It is also more appropriate where the recipient is not legally represented.
Threats of proceedings must be measured
A letter before claim may properly say that proceedings may be issued if the matter is not resolved.
However, threats must be accurate and proportionate. We should not threaten remedies that are unrealistic, excessive or legally unavailable.
In a trespass or nuisance claim, possible remedies may include damages, interest, an injunction if justified, reinstatement or remedial steps, a declaration, costs insofar as recoverable, and such further relief as the court considers appropriate.
A safe formulation is:
“If we do not receive a substantive response within the timeframe above, or if the matter cannot be resolved, our client may instruct us to issue proceedings without further notice to you.”
That is better than saying:
“If you fail to comply, proceedings will be issued immediately and you will be liable for all costs.”
The first version is firm and accurate. The second version may be criticised.
Injunctions must be handled carefully
In trespass and nuisance claims, an injunction may be appropriate where there is a real risk of further interference.
However, injunctions are discretionary remedies. The court will consider whether an injunction is necessary, proportionate, and properly supported by evidence.
The letter should therefore avoid implying that an injunction is automatic.
A safer formulation is:
“Our client may seek an injunction restraining further trespass, nuisance or interference if the evidence justifies such relief and further interference continues or is threatened.”
This preserves the remedy without overstating the position.
Boundary disputes need careful wording
In boundary-related trespass cases, the client may have strong survey evidence. Even so, if the opponent disputes the boundary, the letter should avoid pretending that no dispute can possibly exist.
It may be appropriate to say:
“For the avoidance of doubt, our client is not inviting a fresh boundary debate by this letter. Our client has already obtained surveyor evidence in relation to the boundary position. The present claim concerns the alleged trespass upon, and interference with, land and property which our client says belongs to him.”
It may also be appropriate to ask the opponent to provide any title documents, plans, survey evidence or expert reports upon which they rely.
However, the purpose of pre-action correspondence is to understand and narrow the issues. The letter should not appear to shut down the opponent’s right to explain why they dispute the boundary.
Reviewing draft letters with clients
When we send a draft letter to a client, we welcome comments on factual accuracy.
That includes dates, names, addresses, documents, photographs, sums claimed, the events complained of, and the outcome the client wants to achieve.
We will consider all client comments carefully.
However, we may not accept amendments which remove necessary ADR wording, overstate the costs position, include insults or speculation, make allegations unsupported by the evidence, threaten remedies which are not legally available, misstate the law, remove necessary caveats, make the letter unfair to an unrepresented opponent, or weaken the client’s litigation position.
Where possible, we will incorporate the substance of the client’s point in a legally appropriate way.
Why client wording may be reframed
A client may write something in a way that is emotionally understandable but legally unhelpful.
For example, a client may wish to say:
“You have deliberately vandalised my property and you are clearly trying to intimidate me.”
Unless there is strong evidence for that wording, we may reframe it as:
“Our client’s position is that the actions complained of involved deliberate interference with his property. If you dispute this, please explain your position and provide any evidence upon which you rely.”
This is still firm, but safer.
Another example is:
“You must pay all my legal fees.”
We may reframe that as:
“If proceedings become necessary, our client may ask the court to make such orders as are appropriate in relation to costs, insofar as recoverable under the Civil Procedure Rules and subject to the court’s discretion.”
Again, the point is preserved without overclaiming.
What if a client insists on wording we cannot send?
If a client insists that we send wording which we consider inappropriate, we will explain our concerns.
We may explain that we cannot send the letter in that form because, in our professional judgment, it would risk weakening the client’s position, overstating the legal entitlement, removing wording required to protect the client on ADR and costs, or exposing the client to avoidable criticism later.
That does not mean we are refusing to act in the client’s interests. It means we are acting properly and protecting the client’s position.
If the issue cannot be resolved, we may have to decline to send the letter in the client’s preferred form.
Our approach
Our aim is always to advance the client’s position firmly and effectively.
However, the most effective letter is not necessarily the most aggressive letter.
A good solicitor’s letter should set out the client’s case clearly, identify the evidence relied upon, explain the legal basis of the claim, ask for a sensible remedy, preserve the client’s position on costs, invite ADR where appropriate, and be capable of being shown to a court without embarrassment.
This is particularly important when the opponent is unrepresented.
Clients are encouraged to give full factual instructions and tell us what outcome they want. We will then decide how best to express those instructions in a way that is robust, professional, legally accurate and tactically safe.
At Parachute Law, we can assist with letters before claim, neighbour disputes, trespass claims, nuisance claims, boundary disputes, property interference, injunction strategy, ADR, settlement correspondence and court proceedings.
Related Article:
UK land and property: what is happening with freehold and leasehold reform?
